Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Ed Vanwoudenberg (2nd nomination)


 * The following discussion is an archived debate of the proposed deletion of the article below. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review).  No further edits should be made to this page.

The result was merge to Christian Heritage Party of Canada. czar 02:24, 14 June 2020 (UTC)

Ed Vanwoudenberg

 * – ( View AfD View log )


 * Does not meet WP:POLITICIAN. Has never been elected, lead a party that has never held a seat.--User19004 (talk) 01:59, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of British Columbia-related deletion discussions. • Gene93k (talk) 02:17, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Note: This discussion has been included in the list of Politicians-related deletion discussions.  Kpg  jhp  jm  02:38, 7 June 2020 (UTC)


 * Delete a leader of a minor party that does not have enough importance to make the head default notable.John Pack Lambert (talk) 15:09, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge with Christian Heritage Party of Canada, not independently notable. Horse Eye Jack (talk) 16:21, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge is a good solution. As far as I can tell his party is a very minor one that I never won a major election.  I might have voted to delete, but think merger is a better answer.
 * Merge. I agree with the idea of a merger. Lefcentreright  Discuss   23:28, 7 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Merge Looking through google books there might be enough to keep this article. He was the founder of a national party that has been running for nearly 40 years, albeit never winning anything substanital. With that being said, I'm not sure how much more you could write that what there already is. So its probably better to just merge. AlessandroTiandelli333 (talk) 12:04, 8 June 2020 (UTC)
 * Delete/merge. To be fair, leaders of national political parties aren't automatically non-notable just because their party wasn't successful in elections — they can still be kept if they have enough sources to write a substantive article that clearly passes WP:GNG. But that's not in evidence here, so he does indeed fall below the bar. Bearcat (talk) 18:07, 9 June 2020 (UTC)


 * The above discussion is preserved as an archive of the debate. Please do not modify it. Subsequent comments should be made on the appropriate discussion page (such as the article's talk page or in a deletion review). No further edits should be made to this page.